In the Account window, there is a Tasks button that produces counts of the WUs by various categories, including Application (also, by machine in the Your Computers window). It would be very helpful for the case of "Seti Enhanced" to have a further breakdown as to CPU/GPU or even CPU/NVIDIA/ATI. Since the WUs are tagged by the server, not the user client, the info is there at the server to do this.

There are times when a particular machine has been having problems getting CPU or other kinds of WUs, and this would provide quick knowledge of whether that status has improved (or not).

I am all for the additional info.
If some think this would get too confusing for some users, perhaps it could be toggled by a 'simple view/advanced view' button or some similar fashion.A day without cats is like a day without sunshine.
I speak meow, do you?

While we're asking for minor things to make the tasks pages more user friendly, how about a page selector for those of us who have large numbers of tasks per host? It can take a while to go through 800 tasks in progress, clicking "Next 20" over and over. The web code can't be difficult; every search engine, shopping site, and web-based email system uses some form of it.

We were discussing the same thing at Einstein, and Bernd asked me to put it on their Wish List so he didn't forget.

Where it remains to this day - they haven't even got round to 'filter by application' yet.

I would love to see Einstein implement even as much functionality as Seti has now.DavidSitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

While we're asking for minor things to make the tasks pages more user friendly, how about a page selector for those of us who have large numbers of tasks per host? It can take a while to go through 800 tasks in progress, clicking "Next 20" over and over. The web code can't be difficult; every search engine, shopping site, and web-based email system uses some form of it.

If you know roughly where you're headed for, you can edit the 'offset=' value in the page url (in the address bar) to go directly there - but I agree, a more user friendly way of doing it would be preferable.

If I have more than one page of tasks (Seti@home tasks) in my BOINC Manager, I will need to count them manually in order to know how many are available or running. If I only run Seti@home at a particular point of time, I could have 8 running simultaneously plus one by means of CUDA. Also I could have 10 which may have become finished up and has either been reported to this web-server or is in the process of uploading.

Also there may at times be some 10 or 20 tasks (particularly CUDA-tasks or short duration tasks) at times residing in BOINC Manager which still has not been started up but is either ready to start, waiting to run, or possibly suspended.

In the end these things get to to the point where they rather become a summary of a summary.

Of course most of these things are available for you to check by means of either the Messages tab or the Event Log.

Actually, you would only need CPU/GPU/All on the hardware line ... The applications are already selectable on the line above ...

Hardware: All (x) | GPU (x) | CPU (x)

So how would you select between ATI and Nvidia then?

Claggy

My original thinking didn't account for mixed types of GPU's. From the sUser task list it is easy to get a mixed list of GPU tasks, but from the computer view it would generally only be one or the other. Except in those rare cases where both exist.

So this might be more fitting & uses the current syntax for anonymous apps. As the stock apps use cuda, cuda23, or cuda_fermi they should be included in the filter for NVIDIA GPU, obviously.

Other Coprocessor would be for the yet unknown types that may exist in the future. Such as the MIC devices & other dedicated coprocessor cards.

Sure it is all just smoke in the wind right now, but maybe one of the guys somewhere will think it isn't such a bad idea. Then bang it out in one of their other, other, other, other, other, or other free moments. Which is probably that brief moment between waking up and opening their eyes.

EDIT: As for state sub types the invalid would be nice as well as the actual pending ones. So would a filter for different error types. I think one for each error type should do...SETI@home classic workunits: 93,865 CPU time: 863,447 hours Join the BP6/VP6 User Group today!

If we are going to ask for changes to the Tasks screen I would also like to see an option to be able to sort the tasks based on Time Reported.

When you make changes to your computer and just want to quickly compare your new setup against the previous one this would be very handy, rather than trying to scroll through lots and lots of pages trying to find the latest results.

If we are going to ask for changes to the Tasks screen I would also like to see an option to be able to sort the tasks based on Time Reported.

When you make changes to your computer and just want to quickly compare your new setup against the previous one this would be very handy, rather than trying to scroll through lots and lots of pages trying to find the latest results.

These all seem like good ideas, however my comment would be that all this would put a lot of additional load on the "Data-driven Web Pages" and database servers, I would suggest that these already have a lot to do at the moment.

An alternative might be to offer a "download tasks list as CSV" option; then the sorting / statistical analysis and summary can be done at will by the users' PCs, or BOINCstats, or other, external system to the main S@H servers.

These all seem like good ideas, however my comment would be that all this would put a lot of additional load on the "Data-driven Web Pages" and database servers, I would suggest that these already have a lot to do at the moment.

An alternative might be to offer a "download tasks list as CSV" option; then the sorting / statistical analysis and summary can be done at will by the users' PCs, or BOINCstats, or other, external system to the main S@H servers.

Just my 2p'worth

The counts already exist, except for the (really minor) change I asked about at the beginning of the thread, so that's relatively trivial.

The d/l tasks list would (for a big cruncher, anyway) really hit the DB and the bandwidth, so that is less likely, and would take a lot more code to produce.

Let's start small!
And easier for DA to produce with a minimum of effort, like the counts we get now, which were done (apparently) easily when he became convinced to do them.

These all seem like good ideas, however my comment would be that all this would put a lot of additional load on the "Data-driven Web Pages" and database servers, I would suggest that these already have a lot to do at the moment.

An alternative might be to offer a "download tasks list as CSV" option; then the sorting / statistical analysis and summary can be done at will by the users' PCs, or BOINCstats, or other, external system to the main S@H servers.

Just my 2p'worth

The load on the servers will be almost the same requesting the list of tasks grouped by App, status, hardware or wathever other filter you use and AFAIK the web pages are hooked to the mirror server to avoid interference with the project throughput...

But, yes, the web server itsel will have to deal with extra load... I dont know which server hosts the pages, but it was said that the pages go through the gigabit link so I think is not one the main servers of the project...

Of course, if I have to choose between better project response or fancy filters I'll go for the performance.